Hillary Clinton won California big, by 12 percentage points, in what figures to have ended whatever slim chance Bernie Sanders had in the Democratic race. This race was assumed by many to be much closer based upon late polls that had her leading Sanders by a shrinking 2 percent. How wrong they were. Why? In all fairness, an outlier poll, by the LA Times/USC, had Clinton winning by 10 percent. And the reason they called it more accurately is that they ultimately relied on their model of the “likely voter” rather than their sample of eligible voters. By the way, when the “eligible voters” sample was used in their poll, it yielded results similar to the other polls showing the race a virtual dead-heat. So the more refined “likely voter” sample generated much more accurate results. A little background will help in understanding why different samples resulted in such wildly varying results, and why polling techniques that worked in several prior primaries weren’t appropriate for the California race. You will...

In so many ways this primary season is full of serious, but often amusing, ironies. Mainstream Republican regulars and elected officials might have to run for re-election on a ticket headed by a candidate they not only have distaste for, but likely one whom nearly 2/3s of the general electorate have indicated they disliked. And don’t forget that a not insignificant percentage of the voters simply check off their candidate for President, and then “pull the lever,” or vote for the same party’s nominee for all of the others offices up for election. Against this backdrop consider the only candidates who presently qualify for nomination (according to the rules, which are susceptible to change at the beginning of the party’s convention), are: Donald Trump, who has insulted almost every known minority (including disabled persons), either directly or indirectly. He has been likened by some of the world leaders to Adolph Hitler, by many others simply as an unsteady bully. 560,000 British citizens signed, and sent to Parliament, a petition...

Are super delegates and party assigned delegates unfair? Are open conventions undemocratic? What is the argument against just giving the nomination to the candidate who has the most popular votes going into the convention? These are procedural and therefore technical questions, and yet they are being brought up almost daily by Democratic Party trailer Bernie Sanders, and by Republican Party front-runner Donald Trump. Why all the fuss? Trump because he fears that his pledged delegate count may not quite reach the simple majority of 1237. Also that the Republican Party regulars, “The Establishment,” as it were, might pick someone else–especially if they could keep supporters from reaching a majority for the first two ballots that many of them are pledged to vote for Trump. And Sanders, because of the large super delegate block that seems to be pledged for Hillary. Lets’s deal with the 1237 votes requirement first. That is one-half plus one of the 2475 delegates that will vote at the convention. Ifs a candidate fails to...

Donald Trump once again has threatened not to support the Republican nominee if it is not himself. This should come as no surprise whatsoever to anyone who has followed the erratic and vindictive utterings by the Republican front runner. What should be noted, however, is the nature of Trump’s following, especially those who are part of a backlash to what he has regularly hammered at, namely: “political correctness.” The appeal of Trump’s attacks on political correctness can mean a lot of different things. Most come under the heading of simple decency and respect for all of one’s fellow humans. Polls indicate that a majority of Americans support decency and respect, even to individuals whose lifestyle is not something they are comfortable with. Yet, as Trump’s support demonstrates, a sizable number have been mobilized into a backlash against having to be politically correct. Here, I am not talking about having to call a postman (or a postwoman) a postal person. No! It is clearly a backlash with racial and...

It took Mormon Utah to say no to Donald Trump’s bombastic, boastful, bullying, and vulgar campaign style. That was the message from Tuesday’s primaries. Those who identify themselves as Born Again and Evangelical Christians continued to vote for Trump in Arizona, as they have across the South. Not so in Utah where Trump was overwhelmingly rejected by Republican voters. Utah is about 65 percent Mormon. Ted Cruz, himself an Evangelical Christian, won largely Mormon Utah, Tuesday, with an overwhelming 69.2 percent of the vote, thereby garnering all of its 40 delegates to the Republican convention. He lost Arizona with a large evangelical population In Utah, Donald Trump finished a distant third, behind John Kasich with only 14 percent of the caucus vote. In raw vote terms, Cruz won over 122,100 voters , in Utah, to Trump’s 24,782. Idaho is another state with a large Mormon population. In Idaho, Ted Cruz earlier won with 45.4 percent of the vote to Trump’s 28.1 percent (with Rubio still in the race when Idaho voted, he...